:rolleyes:
This is what I was remembering re: messages left with neighbors. Sorry for my mistake re: discussing the bill itself with the neighbor. However, if the debtor ends up being embarrassed by recieving said message, one can only assume that the collector has developed little sneaky ways of informing the neigbor of exactly what the message is regarding.
**
You contradict yourself. Have you (or anyone) seen most of the apples on the planet? Of course not. Niether has anyone talked to most of the debtors on the planet.
Most debtors with charged of credit card accounts are scumbags. I have talked to enough of them to make this determination.
**
I have never worked with medical accounts so I chose not to address that. How does this make me inconsistent?
Yes, some debtors have only one bad account that somehow progresses all the way into collections due to a dispute or lack of contact information. I would not treat this person with the same harshness as other debtors. How does this make me inconsistent?
bolding mine.
I see. You pretending to have the best interests of the debtor at heart is somehow better than taking a hard line with them. Some trick and decieve, some shout and yell, some scare and intimidate, any way you cut it, though, politely asking if they feel like paying won’t get the job done.
**
Fuck you.
Wishing that personal financial harm come to me is pretty low. If I didn’t pay my bills I would expect to get a phone call about it. I wouldn’t expect the person calling to be all hugs and kisses about it.
lezlers
To clarify about the nearby thing: I don’t think most collectors are actually discussing the bill with the neighbors. I know I never did. This would be very illegal. But, also, it would probably insure that they wouldn’t leave the message. Between those two reasons, I think most if not all collectors would have no reason to discuss the bill w/ the third party.
As far as the embarassment, I meant the pervieved embarassment of the debtor. As I said earlier, as soon as they get the message from the neighbor they assume things. They assume that the bill has been discussed by them. The plus side to this is that they are usually so angry that they will call back, so you at least get them on the phone.
There’s a difference between “taking the hard line” and being a complete asshole, and personally insulting someone. I can tell you from experience that I was a whole lot more likely to work with a collector that didn’t treat me like scum than one who did. Anyway you cut it, judging someone when you don’t know them, or their story, is just plain wrong.
If you’d like to hear the story about why I got into debt, I’d be happy to share. Especially since I know quite a few other good people that share very similar stories. But then again, you’re so quick to judge that it probably wouldn’t make a difference. If you just looked at my credit report you’d just assume I was a scumbag debtor right off the bat, and treat me in kind.
I wouldn’t judge all collectors as holier than thou, judgemental assholes just from having spoken with you and some other ass much collectors I’ve had the displeasure of conversing with. Good thing too, because Otto seems to be an allright guy/girl.
But people in financial troubles because they had big medical expenses can have issues paying other debts for this reason
See above. How would you know? Even if only 1% of the debtors found themselves in such a situation for reasons they had no control over, these at least don’t deserve contempt. You might find their issues are no concern of yours, but there’s no reason not to treat people with respect. Because you can’t know whether or not they deserve it.
I’ve never had issues with debt collectors, but I’ve been twice be called a liar about money issues by people belonging to some organization because I was in an unusual situation. It’s extremely irritating. Once, my requests were plainly ignored for perhaps one month by everybody I got in touch with, until I finally found the one guy who knew that indeed I could possibly be in the situation I described (most people before him would just tell me “that’s not possible” and stopped at that).
In another case, I had to get an appointment with a live person to solve the issue. I explained the situation, with the documents needed, and the issue was quickly settled. I told her I was quite pissed by the way I’ve been treated until then. She told me upfront that in my file was written “obviously of bad faith and very insistant” (which incidentally is illegal under french law, but that’s another matter). Then told me sternly that since I was of bad faith, I couldn’t expect to be treated very politely. Before noticing my glance ( :rolleyes: ) and realizing that I just proved to her I wasn’t five minutes ago. She went on explaining to me that there were a lot of people who are of bad faith. That’s very possible. But that wasn’t enough of a reason to treat me rudely. They could have behaved politely, even if they were ready to bet their shirt that I was lying. Just in case, you know, that I wouldn’t.
That’s why I dislike this attitude of assuming that people don’t deserve to be treated nice. Because you just can’t know what they deserve. They can be in a complicated and unusual situation. They can have found themselves in a dire situation they had no control over. They can have been wronged. They can be very nice people. You just don’t know. You know nothing about them or their life. With an assumption like yours, you’re going to treat like shit people who don’t deserve it.
And if you think their problems and feelings aren’t any of your business, then you should just treat them professionnally and avoid to have any personnal feelings about them. Your “they don’t deserve to be treated nice” isn’t neutral. It at least sounds judgemental and prejudicied, and that’s not a professional attitude, in my opinion.
I am personally attacking debtors in this thread. This is after all the pit, and I felt like venting. But, please note: I wouldn’t personally insult the debtors when I worked in collections. It’s simply not a good way to get them to pay. I would be professional, and do my job.
I would not however, be willing to just tell the debtors what they wanted to hear. When you call a company to place an order you talk to a customer service rep. You expect them to be nice to you, and do what you want, because it is thier job. Collections is not customer service. Collectors don’t to tell the customer that he/she is always right. In fact, collectors don’t deal with customers at all. They deal with debtors.
You say “judging someone when you don’t know them, or their story, is just plain wrong”.
Let me explain. I worked for an agency hired by the credit card company. These people owed money to the credit card company. The credit agreements that people sign state that the credit card comany has the right to call the balance in full due whenever they like. Because these people hadn’t paid in 6 months the comany has decided the ballance in full is now due. Whether or not a collect “knows their story” is not relevant. The balance of the account is due. The collector on the phone didn’t make this situation happen. But, they have the job of making them pay. If they patiently listen to every sob story then they aren’t calling enough accounts. Also, every debtor who is allowed to tell a sob story hangs up thinking that it’s ok, because now the non-payed debt is justified by some excuse.
I used to tell debtors the phone number to debtors anonymous. It wasn’t my job to help these people. I was supposed to collect the bill.
**
I’d be happy to hear it.
Okie Dokie.
I’ll give you the Cliff Notes version.
Typical story of a young, stupid, trusting, girl. Moved in with boyfriend. At the time, boyfriend and girl (this is me, for anyone who hasn’t figured it out yet and cares) both work at same resteraunt making good money.
Girl is able to pay her bills just fine. And half the rent. And her car payment. She uses her credit cards frequently because she is able to pay the balance. Balances begin to climb as she stupidly lets boyfriend purchase things on said card. See, boyfriend doesn’t have credit, and girl is in love :rolleyes:
Trouble’s a-brewing. Boyfriend is accused of gasp! stealing from resteraunt that him and girl both work at. Boyfriend is promptly fired. Ruh-roh. :eek: As boy takes his sweet-ass time finding another job, girl is now left paying 100% of the bills, rent and tuition (oh yes, girl is also paying her way through school). Now, girl was perfectly able to pay * her share * of bills, but is struggling to pick up boy’s half as well. She picks up extra shifts.
Boy has now gotten another job but is failing to bring home any money from it. He’s got a three-week long training program, then the tips are horrid, excuses, excuses, escuses. (Girl does not know to this day what boy was really doing with the money he was making, but oh-well).
Any-hoo, management at girls resteraunt decide if boy was stealing, and girl lives with boy then she can’t be trusted either. Management decides to “push” girl out. (Anyone still reading and curious about this, it’s when they cut your shifts, give you horrid hours (usually when I had class) ect. until you have no choice but to quit.) Girl hunts for new job then quits old one. Girl is responsible see? But new job gets about half as many tips as old one, with which she was * already * struggling to make ends meet with. 
I’m sure you can see where this is going. Bills pile up, girl can’t pay, they go to collections. And girl is thus treated like a “scumbag” who “chose not” to pay her bills.
While I agree that you probably don’t have time to listen to everyone’s sob stories, I still stand by my statement that when you try to work with them (there was no way in hell I could pay off everything when a collector demanded it. I could however, pay off everything via payment plans. And two years later, I’m debt free) you’ll be a hell of a lot more likely to get paid.
You claim you’re professional and don’t insult people, ect. ect. But the distain that comes through in your opinion of “scumbag debtors” in your posts I have a feeling can quite easily come through in your interactions with them.
I’m very sorry for the hijack, I realized as I was half-way through that it may not be appropriate. But dammit, I was already half-way through! Sauron, I apologize.
Debaser
No contradiction on my part at all, just some reading comprehension issues on your part. See, just like I can’t say that “most apples are red” because I haven’t seen most apples, it’s messed up for you to say that “most debtors are scumbags” because you haven’t dealt with most debtors.
So now you’re narrowing it down to a specific type of debtor. You still haven’t talked to “most” of them so it’s just as fucked up to make blanket statements, but hey, at least your blanket’s a bit smaller now.
When did I say that I pretended to have the best interests of the debtors at heart? What I said was that it’s easier and more productive to help the debtor think that what I’m doing is working with him. If I can get $100 bucks today so we only have to absorb a $100 loss instead of sucking up a $200 loss because I treated the caller like an asshole, that’s better for me, better for the company and better for the debtor.
Sure it will, if you can do it right. If you’re too limited as a collector to gt the job done any other way than by lying, cheating and intimidating, that’s your damage. I happen to be able to be successful without having to resort to threats and lies. There’s a difference between being firm with someone and being abusive.
Oh sorry, you must have me confused with one of your clients.
Hmm. I can see this both ways with regards to personal answering machines.
The law says that in the initial oral communication with the consumer, the debt collector must divulge that he or she works for a collection agency. I’m wondering, though, if that means the first time the debt collector actually speaks with the consumer, or if a message on a home answering machine would qualify as “oral communication.”
Perhaps it’s a Montana law, as opposed to the FDCPA, that your husband was referencing.
Since it’s my rant, I’m going with the interpretation that “oral communication” includes messages left on answering machines. Frankly, I can’t see how leaving a message on a home answering machine could be an invasion of privacy, any more than sending a collection letter to someone’s home is an invasion of privacy. That still gives me the moral and legal high ground in my beef with Investigator Coleman. Regardless, he lied to my wife about this very thing when he talked with her, so I’m still justified in my actions.
According to your idioitic logic here, no one on the planet is capable of making any statements about anything. John Madden shoudln’t be saying “most of the time…” regarding football because he hasn’t seen most football games that are played. There are too many games every Sunday to watch them all, so I guess no one is entitled to discuss them. :rolleyes:
**
I took the time to explain this already. All I have done is to define what I meant by the term “debtor”. Since everyone is techinically a debtor that has any credit at all, I obviously wasn’t talking about the population at large. I have just cleared up this obvious point. And I did so before you even addressed it. To attack me for it now is just lame.
**
Cute. As I have said in this thread several times, I haven’t worked in collections in years. However, when I did, I successfully collected lots of money.
I have never said that being abusive was my only tactic. I would be nice to plenty of debtors if that’s what it took depending on the situation. A good collector can shift gears and use different tactics with different people. All I am saying is that most debtors who have charged off credit card accounts are scumbags who don’t deserve to be treated nice. They aren’t entitled to the same treatment that a company reserves for good, paying customers. If being firm, making demands, and using tricks is what it takes to get them to pay what they owe, then the collectors have every right to do such things within the law. You admitted in your post that you tricked people. ( “even if worked with them is only thier perception”. )
And, um, clients. At every agency I ever worked the clients we had were Chase Manhattan, Citibank, MNBA, etc. The people we call on the phone are called debtors. Not clients, not customers.
Debasor,
You have sucessfully, completely missed the points of both Otto and myself’s posts.
You’re digging a deeper hole here. When Otto, or John Madden, or whoever says something like “Most of the apples in the world are red” or “Most of the time, the Packers run on third and short” it’s entirely possible they’re using statistics and averages. In other words, someone has taken the time to determine that 55 percent of all the apples grown in the world are Washington Red. Or that 67 percent of the time when facing third-and-two or less, the Packers run the ball. (I realize Otto wasn’t saying the apples thing, in fact he was saying just the opposite. Work with me here.)
No, you clarified your earlier definition of “debtor.” You’d already made your point regarding that (and quite well, too). But you’re still extrapolating a possibly unwarranted conclusion from your experience. We don’t know if you’ve talked with a statistically valid subset of debtors with charged-off credit cards to allow you to say that “most” of them are scumbags. For example, let’s say you’ve talked with 200 of them. (I know, I know, you’re going to come back and say “I’ve probably talked with 10,000!” Again, work with me here.) Every single one of them was a scumbag, in your opinion. But let’s say that the entire set of people in the country with charged-off credit cards numbered 100,000. Surely you can see that 200 isn’t enough of a sample to be able to make a determination about “most” of those debtors.
lezlers, I understand what you and Otto are saying. It’s not that I don’t get it. I just disagree.
I sympathize with your situation. Of course you don’t like to think of yourself as a
But, you know what, very few people (see: bankrupcy attorneys who are also debtors) actually choose not to pay thier bills when they have the money to. Most people who get into debt trouble have a story like yours. Or worse. Businesses fail. Medical emegencies happen. You just didn’t pay your bills.
The first time I would have gotten you on the phone I would have demanded the balance in full be paid, and I wouldn’t listen to your story. Sorry, but that’s the way it would have been.
If I do this to 100 people, a couple of them will actually pay. I must demand the balance from everyone though, because it’s a numbers game. Also, the contract you sign with the credit card companies states they have this right.
After battling it out with you a couple of times I would have eventually gotten you on a payment plan paying it off in a couple of years, like you said happened. But, I would be doing you a favor by doing this.
No you wouldn’t. You would be doing yourself the favour.
If the debtor in question refuses, or is unable, to pay the full balance then you don’t get ANY money. You’re not doing the debtor any favours, you’re simply making it so you can actually collect on the debt and make some money yourself.
[slight hijack]
Well, from my limited information and the reading of various consumer websites, it seems that plenty of banks, large department stores, credit card companies and other creditors treat even their “good paying customers” like “scumbags” a lot of the time.
Just check out the various Pit rants and Great Debates threads on customer service, banking, etc.
[/slight hijack]
No, actually, I don’t trick people. I tell them what our expectations are and I try to do so in such a way as to make them understand why it is to their benefit to pay their bill. I am not allowed to “trick” them or “deceive” them or lie to them.
For example: someone calls me and they want to pay $70 on their bill. We won’t accept that amount to keep the line in service but we will accept, say, $125 along with a payment schedule. If I bluntly say “no, pay the whole balance or piss off” in my best customer service manner, then they are likely to tell me to fuck off and I don’t see a dime. If, however, I let them know they can pay a little additional and set them up on a plan and how doing so will benefit them, they are much more likely to get me at least the down payment. So in the course of one conversation I go from getting ZERO to getting $125. I don’t know how your bosses operated, but my bosses prefer to hear stories of how I collected close to half a million dollars over the last six months instead of stories of my moral superiority to the scumbags on the phone.
Wow, it must be nice to be perfect to the point where you can speak with such smugness. I did pay my bills. I paid the ones I physically could without becoming either homeless, or not eating. I am so, so very sorry that I chose to pay my rent over the balance of my gym membership. :rolleyes: And you wonder why so many of your debtors could care less about your empty threats. When you are looking at becoming evicted, the $200.00 you owe to Gold’s Gym aint gonna mean a goddamn thing to you.
Like many others have said, you’d be doing yourself a favor. There’s not a whole lot you can do if someone does not have the money to pay their bill in full. You can sue. But I seriously doubt your company is going to want to shell out all that money over a $50.00 account. So basically, you’re going to be wasting a lot of time and energy bullying someone who **does not have the means to pay you in full. ** For what? To feel morally superior? Just to be an asshole?
Like I said before, I dealt with some nice bill collectors. I did everything in my power to get them their money. As long as it didn’t result in me being evicted from my home. In my case, that meant payment plans. The ones that were assholes, how you yourself admitted you would’ve been? They didn’t get a dime from me. I simply called the agency and made damn sure they didn’t get credited when I did pay up. I simply kept calling until I found someone to work with me who didn’t treat me as if I were “scum.” :wally
We lived in a town with a large population of college students, where the person playing back the answering machine messages might not have been the person for whom the message was intended. If you don’t know your roommate well - dorm residents, for example - you might not want them knowing details of your financial staus.
The letters from this agency, however, came in an envelope with either no return address or a return address that just had the street address and didn’t identify the type of business. I know because I got one from them when I bounced a check, and I didn’t know who it was from until I opened it.
Sure. I wasn’t trying to undermine you, just trying to give lezlers a possible explanation for why the people leaving messages on her machine didn’t identify themselves as working for a collection agency.
Oh, I didn’t think you were trying to undermine me, JayLa. I have this habit of constantly trying to see the other side of things. While it comes in handy sometimes, it also prevents me from working up much of a righteous anger, because I keep thinking “What if the other person is right?”
However, if “Investigator Coleman” had done any homework on my “debt,” he would have been able to rule out some of the variables you mention. The town I live in is tiny; we have no local college. I have a (to me) sizeable mortgage, so I’m not living in an apartment or a dorm with the possibility of roommates. Besides, even if that were the case, I would much rather my roommates think I had a bill collector chasing me for a $70 debt than believe I was getting sued, as his first message implied.
I think you all are coming down unnecessarily hard on Debaser. He had a job to do, and by all accounts, he used every legal means available to get the job done. If he had done anything illegal or unethical, I could see roasting him, but he (apparently) has not. So he used “nearby messages.” So what? They’re legal.
As for all the talk of statistical averages and whether Debaser has the right to talk about “most debtors,” I find it far easier to believe someone with extensive experience in the field over others, who only have experience on the receiving end, or none at all, or who are merely offended by impolitic tactics. I’d say he’s far more qualified to talk about “most” and “average” debtors than most anybody else in this thread (statistical analysis of posters to this thread made possible by a grant from the Wallace Foundation.)
lezlers, you can tell me to go fuck myself for this opinion, but it’s made in all honesty: I certainly sympathize with the horrible experience you had, and I’m sorry you had to work yourself out of debt, but why is the long, involved story the creditor’s problem? Debaser is right…I doubt it’s very profitable for a debt collector to empathize with every story that he or she hears, because then fewer calls get made, debts don’t get collected, and the original creditor doesn’t get paid. And if the creditor doesn’t get paid, neither does the collection agent.
Sauron, it sounds as if Mr. Coleman is an unprofessional asshole, and I hope he gets what’s coming to him. Sounds like you have an excellent case against him and his company.
But why all the hate directed at Debaser? It’s an honest job, and it sounds to me like he did it in an honest manner.